"Nappy" and "Hos" Not the Only Words You Can't Say on the Radio

David Weigel | May 2, 2007

A cadre of Virginia legislators are pushing a Blacksburg-area radio station to stop syndicating the Neal Boortz show.

Two weeks ago, Boortz criticized the victims of the April 16 shootings for “standing in terror waiting for (their) turn to be executed.” All eight Virginia stations that syndicate Boortz were sent a letter Monday afternoon signed by Democratic Delegates Stephen Shannon, Jim Shuler and Chuck Caputo. The letter called the radio host’s remarks “hateful” and the radio stations’ responses “disappointing and meager.”

“I feel (Virginia radio stations) have a sense of public responsibility in the immediate aftermath of this tragedy to exercise some restraint. What they did was let this broadcaster peel off outrageous assertions that somehow it was the fault of the students and the faculty members who were killed or injured…There’s simply no place for this out-of-state radio host to make such claims on Virginia’s airwaves immediately after this tragedy has taken place,” Shannon said.

...[WPSK 107.1 FM manager Scott] Stevens said that the station would take up investigating the case today, seeking the audio of Boortz’s comments from the host and weighing Boortz’s reflections on his remarks before rendering a decision. Stevens said that removing Boortz from the station’s content was “certainly on the table,” and that the station would more than likely offer Boortz the opportunity to personally address the local area.

Boortz actually walked back the remarks after he made them, although he was careful to note that he still rejected a "culture of passivity."

Comments

|5.2.07 @ 11:36AM|#

Boortz can say what he wants. The VA stations can carry his show, or drop it, as they wish. The politicians can make hay. And we can blog and snark as is our want.

It's all good.

|5.2.07 @ 11:44AM|#

I more or less agree with Warren, but I think it may be a bad sign when politicians start letting us know who they think should and who should not be broadcasting. It would have been fine for the pols to just publicly disagree with Boortz, but saying the radio stations have a public responsibility, that there is no place for Boortz (according to them, some kind of outside agitator) on Virgina radio, sounds like a threat that they could, eventually, back up with legislation or regulations.

David Ross|5.2.07 @ 11:45AM|#

Try this on for size: "there's simply no place for this out-of-state website to make such claims (or to say anything) on Texas's airwaves and cables immediately after this tragedy has taken place (or whenever)."

Shorter version: Stephen Shannon, Jim Shuler and Chuck Caputo can just eat me.

|5.2.07 @ 11:45AM|#

Yeah, and then I woulda been, like, POW! and the dude would have been totally jacked!

Boortz then went into a long story about a man who repeatedly insulted him in a bar, ending with, "...and if he had said ONE MORE WORD...," then trailing off.

Sandy|5.2.07 @ 11:50AM|#

Did Boortz tell you about the time he built a blimp and fought the Naaazees?

|5.2.07 @ 11:51AM|#

Boortz criticized the victims of the April 16 shootings for "standing in terror waiting for (their) turn to be executed.

This Boortz guy is an idiot. The victims weren't standing at all. They were hiding behind furniture or lying on the floor.

Mike Laursen|5.2.07 @ 11:55AM|#

In the San Francisco area, they re-launched station, KSFO, a few years ago. At first it sounded like they might have some libertarian talk shows. If I recall correctly, their libertarian turned out to be pro-war Boortz. And soon he was gone, and it was all conservatives.

Just months ago, they re-launched station, KTRB. It sounded like they might have some libertarian talk shows, but its turned out to be pro-war libertarian Boortz, again, and a bunch of conservative talk shows.

I really, really miss Penn.

|5.2.07 @ 11:55AM|#

Sigh. I think politicians should not comment on the exercise of free speech. If a citizen--even one with a big audience--says something, well, that's his right. These jokers in government have bully pulpits all, and they can certainly challenge what someone says, but to challenge his ability to state such opinions on the airwaves offends the principles of the freedom of speech and often has the effect of chilling further speech. Bad, whether I like the ideas being restricted or not.

In conclusion. . .Fuck the FCC. And the draft :)

TallDave|5.2.07 @ 11:57AM|#

Boortz is right, if boorish.

Like 9/11, this is a non-repeatable atrocity. The passengers on Flight 93 proved that you can't use an airplane as a guided missile; once people realize they're going to die anyway, they're going to fight back. Similar logic applies here.

|5.2.07 @ 11:57AM|#

What is it with everyone who thinks they are entitled to be free of those opinions with which they disagree? Or, oh wait, these are politicians aren't they...now I get it.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 11:58AM|#

Actually, Abdul, in some rooms they were blockading doors while other people evacuated through windows. In other rooms, they were taking cover because if you don't have the time to coordinate with other people and come up with a good plan of action, the next best thing is to take cover.

Lone heroes don't usually live. A heroic action is far more likely to be successful if people have the time to coordinate with each other. That's generally rather difficult while the bullets are flying. (And no, the few seconds that it takes to reload probably isn't enough time for people to recognize and seize on the opportunity.)

|5.2.07 @ 12:01PM|#

The passengers on Flight 93 initially complied with the hijackers, going to the back of the plane as directed. Of course they did.

They also had several minutes to get their wits about them, figure out what was going on, discuss what to do, come up with a plan, and screw up their courage.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 12:05PM|#

Not to mention that on Flight 93 they had the knowledge that rescue was impossible. That clarified the list of options. At VA Tech, they had good reason to believe that rescue might be imminent.

Lichtenberg|5.2.07 @ 12:05PM|#

TallDave

Aside from wimpy professors, these were children. They may think they're adults, but children will almost always cower in fear. And that's no fault to them. This IS repeatable, because all kids are vulnerable. And, no, I'm not suggesting they should be coddled like little babies.

shecky|5.2.07 @ 12:07PM|#

Boortz needs to be kicked in the balls for trying to pass off this "culture of passivity" meme, along with Steyn and a couple other whack jobs who were peddling the idea in the aftermath of the shootings. Not censored.

Rhywun|5.2.07 @ 12:07PM|#

Y'know, until a psychotic mass-murderer is pointing a gun at me, I'm not going to judge the pussiness of the victims in question. What a fucking disgusting view.

Actually, I have had a gun pointed at me - twice. In neither case did I rush the man holding the gun. Guess that makes me a pussy.

|5.2.07 @ 12:07PM|#

thoreau, you're talking as if he just morphed into the hallways and rooms and executed those people instantaneouslyy. Besides reloading, there is also the time it takes to aim and the time it take to walk over to the next room. There was more then enough time for people to 'coordinate' as you said. Im not passing judgement on their decission to seek cover, nore am I saying that I would have been a hero in a similar situation, Im just saying the time elapsed presented plenty of opportunity for other outcomes.

|5.2.07 @ 12:07PM|#

And, as a matter of fact, it was imminent. Contrary to the rumors, the students in the building reported that the police responded very quickly, apparently scaring the guy away from one door his fighting to get through before he shot himself.

Think about that - you're locked in a room, terrified that a mass murderer is going to burst in at any moment, and you report that the police responded quickly? Each minute must seem like an hour in that situation.

Lichtenberg|5.2.07 @ 12:08PM|#

to add to what joe & thoreau wrote:

it takes a hell of a lot of nerve to recognize your own imminent death and act accordingly--very few people can do so in mere moments, especially scared children

|5.2.07 @ 12:10PM|#

At VA Tech, they had good reason to believe that rescue might be imminent.

That would be an example of that "culture of passivity"

...especially scared children

they werent children

ed|5.2.07 @ 12:11PM|#

it may be a bad sign when politicians start letting us know who they think should and who should not be broadcasting

Politicians have always held this power over broadcasters. They bamboozle the public into thinking they (the public) "own" the airwaves, then claim -- as representatives of the public -- that they have a right to "oversee" broadcasters' programming, issuing fines and even threatening to revoke licenses when they really get their tits in a wringer.

Politicians will always act in a craven and cynical manner, and they will pander to their constituents when expedient. The answer, as always, is to abolish the FCC.

VM|5.2.07 @ 12:12PM|#

Rhywun -

you should have gotten into a karate stance and fought off the entire Iranian navy with a toothache!

At least that's what teh intertubz tuff guys would do.

(which is why one should only read Mediageek and Thoreau (apologies if anybody is omitted) about guns and self defense)

|5.2.07 @ 12:13PM|#

Am I missing some reference in the story to proposed FCC action?

|5.2.07 @ 12:13PM|#

How anyone can say what they would have done in that situation is beyond me. Even a trained individual would have been surprised and off guard inside a college classroom. Taking cover is the first thing that comes to your mind. The guy had a pistol in each hand. It would have been extremely risky for anyone to try to subdue him.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 12:13PM|#

val-

In some of the rooms that had warning, people were blockading doors while others evacuated through windows. That's hardly passive behavior.

As far as trying to act during the time that it takes to aim, charging at him will make you an instant target. So the only reason to do it is if you think it's likely to work. It's far more likely to work if multiple people charge at once (ideally from different directions). He might get one, even two, but he won't get them all. Taking those risks is never easy, but it's gotta be easier if you think that the bastard who's attacking you will at least be stopped.

|5.2.07 @ 12:14PM|#

You know how they say that 'hind vision is 20-20? Apprently thats not always the case. 32 people were executed in cold blood and we still have people here defending the hide-&-wait-for-rescue as the correct course of action.

ed|5.2.07 @ 12:15PM|#

re: not being able to say "nappy" or "ho" on the radio, is George Carlin now having to revise his famous list?

|5.2.07 @ 12:16PM|#

"At VA Tech, they had good reason to believe that rescue might be imminent."

Yes, the impeccable record of timely police responses to such incidents is proof of that.

|5.2.07 @ 12:17PM|#

Absent any plausible reason to think a different response would have reduced the body count, val, there is no reason to conclude, with hindsight, that it was not the correct course of behavior.

Scooby|5.2.07 @ 12:17PM|#

Lichtenberg

These weren't kids, they're of the same age as just about every PVT, PFC, and SPC in the Army and Marines. Of course, training and experience is a bit varies a bit between the grunts and the coddled college kids, but their all adults, just the same.

Jack|5.2.07 @ 12:18PM|#

Glad to see that the Fightin' 101'st Keyboard Commandos are still at marching strength!

Also, whoever made the "wimpy professors" comment should look up Liviu Lebrescu

|5.2.07 @ 12:19PM|#

mediageek,

And fortunately, we don't have to speculate on whether their belief was reasonable; we now know that it was, and that the police got to the scene quickly and immediately went inside, running around and looking for the killer.

In other words, the people who assumed that the police would take cover outside and only slowly enter the building have been proven defintively wrong.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 12:19PM|#

I said:
At VA Tech, they had good reason to believe that rescue might be imminent.

val said:
That would be an example of that "culture of passivity"

Maybe it is passive, but it can also be quite rational. A "culture of passivity" is only an apt description for a situation if people consistently act in a passive manner, even when it's not rational. OTOH, if you see some rooms where people are coordinating escape because they have the opportunity, other rooms where people are taking cover as the next best option, it's more likely that people responded rationally to the best opportunities available, rather than letting passivity preclude rational survival decisions.

Charging is certainly not a passive response, but it may not be terribly rational either. It's only a rational response if (1) you have people working with you or (2) you know that there are no other options, i.e. no chance of rescue.

ed|5.2.07 @ 12:19PM|#

"I feel (Virginia radio stations) have a sense of public responsibility in the immediate aftermath of this tragedy to exercise some restraint....There's simply no place for this out-of-state radio host to make such claims on Virginia's airwaves immediately after this tragedy has taken place."

The threat is implied by the language, joe. They didn't quite say, "Nice radio station. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it," but the threat is there nonetheless.

tlxtftrf|5.2.07 @ 12:20PM|#

Lets get one thing straight, if this situation or a similar one happened to Neal Boortz, he'd be cowering under his desk in a puddle of his own urine, crying for his mother, and praying that when the gunman didn't hit him in the cock. I am so sick of these machismo right wing radio assholes talking about how they would act tough in given situations (Savage and his stories, Bill O'Reilly and his fantasies, etc.). The truth is that behind their veneer of being a tough guy, most of them are too big of fat asses to even get up with assistance, let alone fight back against an armed assailant without a weapon of their own.

That being said boortz has every right to be a hypocritical pussy.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 12:22PM|#

mediageek-

I'm not saying that they had any certainty about their prospects for rescue. I'm saying that on Flight 93 they had ZERO chance for rescue. And they had time to think about that fact, and come together to formulate a plan.

I'm not going to lambast people as passive when (1) we have ample evidence that many of the classrooms were in fact coordinating activity to survive and (2) it's hard to coordinate any sort of defensive activity on the spur of the moment while bullets are flying. Even soldiers and cops generally take cover when the bullets start flying, so they can live long enough to coordinate a response. They have the advantages of having already trained together before it's time to act.

Lichtenberg|5.2.07 @ 12:23PM|#

val

they were children, at least from my point of view, and anyone can jump in with comments about how today's 21-year-olds are more weak and childish than yesterday's 14-year-olds because of our infantilizing society/or whatever...but they were children

And please don't say they were "executed." I really despise the mis-use of language like this. They were murdered. Execution is a state function as a punishment for wrongdoing. This was murder.

Ron Hardin|5.2.07 @ 12:23PM|#

How come Boortz hasn't told the politicians to f* off?

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 12:23PM|#

Blah, bad phrasing. Let's try that again:

I'm not saying that VA Tech students had any certainty about their prospects for rescue. I'm saying that things were different than on Flight 93, where the passengers had ZERO chance for rescue.

|5.2.07 @ 12:24PM|#

May be it is passive, but it can also be quite rational.

Its the wait for rescue part that is a passivity issue with me. However what is also very possible is that that hide and seek cover response was very irrational as well. Fear does that too many people.
The whole fight-or-flight response is very instictual and not rational.

wsdave|5.2.07 @ 12:24PM|#

joe,
"Absent any plausible reason to think a different response would have reduced the body count, val, there is no reason to conclude, with hindsight, that it was not the correct course of behavior."

Pretty much ANY waiting around for someone else to take care of you is a bad plan. Would fighting have reduced the body count? Maybe not, but at least they would have died trying.

|5.2.07 @ 12:25PM|#

"In other words, the people who assumed that the police would take cover outside and only slowly enter the building have been proven defintively wrong."

Joe, how much time passed from the first 911 call to the SWAT cops actually showing up?

Cho's rampage was over in nine minutes. Even in a perfect world, I have a hard time envisioning a group of cops being able to assemble, brief, gear up, and drive to the scene in that short of a time span.

Jozef|5.2.07 @ 12:25PM|#

The shooting happened on a Monday morning. Maybe Boortz is too old to remember, but I still do - Monday morning college students are zombies; the only person who's fully awake is the teacher. Given that many students didn't even recognize the gun shots for what they were (come on; those were engineering students, not someone with common sense like management students), I'm not surprised at the number of deaths. No culture of passivity there.

What really riled people down here in Atlanta, though, was that after this segment at the Boortz show they played Pat Benatar's "Hit me with the best shot".

|5.2.07 @ 12:26PM|#

Thoreau,

I was pretending to be offended that Boortz described the victims as "standing" instead of "hiding" because I thought it would be an obvious attempt at humor. I agree with you that hiding is pretty logical if you're being chased by a psycho with a gun and you don't have one.

|5.2.07 @ 12:26PM|#

# Mike Laursen | May 2, 2007, 11:55am | #

# In the San Francisco area, they
# re-launched station, KSFO,
# a few years ago. At first it sounded
# like they might have some libertarian
# talk shows. If I recall correctly, their
# libertarian turned out to be pro-war Boortz. # And soon he was gone, and it was all
# conservatives.

I haven't listened to KSFO in a while, but I did listen often during the 90s and early 2000s (during which I witnessed the rise of "The Savage Nation"). I don't recall Boortz -- was there a recent "relaunch" that I perhaps missed which featured him? At one point, however, several years ago, they did have a self-described libertarian in the evening: Brian Wilson. He wasn't as interesting to me as Gene Burns, who "competed" with him in the same timeslot over at sister station KGO, but often Gene would have topics that didn't concern me, or he would be out of town and leaving the show to a guest host, so I would listen to Wilson. It seems to me that he was more supportive of war than I would have expected a libertarian to be but not nearly to the level of what I have heard from Boortz.

After Wilson departed, I don't recall that there was anyone on KSFO who would even claim (sincerely or not) to be "libertarian."

|5.2.07 @ 12:27PM|#

ed,

If the bagger at the supermarket said those exact words, I doubt you would consider it a threat of legal action, just the expression of an opinion.

That said, I agree that officeholders should be aware that their statements can often carry this subtext, and need to either be very careful about the terms they use, or just leave the criticism to the private section.

The private sector did a pretty good job getting rid of Imus. Thanks, Reverands.

highnumber|5.2.07 @ 12:27PM|#

(which is why one should only read Mediageek and Thoreau (apologies if anybody is omitted) about guns and self defense)

LarryA


. . .Fuck the FCC. And the draft :)

Fuck you very much!

|5.2.07 @ 12:28PM|#

Boortz has every right to say what he said, but he is still an obnoxious asshole, like all the rest. It's impossible to judge people's behavior in life-or-death situations, because they're so far out of our everyday experience, yet pricks like these keep doing it. I'd like to think I could perform under that kind of stress, but who can say for sure?

Censorship is unnecessary, because hopefully, this kind of stuff will just lose listenership. Of course, if stations wanna drop him, good for them. I know I don't listen to Boortz anymore for precisely that reason: he's intolerable. You can practically hear the spittle flying off his lips as he rants. Just don't let the FCC get involved, please!

|5.2.07 @ 12:29PM|#

I would have shot back.

Shot back with Mind Bullets!

dhex|5.2.07 @ 12:30PM|#

boortz and chalupa should team up to rid the world of pussies.

boor-tz indeed...

|5.2.07 @ 12:30PM|#

Liviu Lebrescu is a hero.

No matter how much I'd like to think that I'd do the same, I'm pretty sure I'd have been one of the first out the window.

Lichtenberg|5.2.07 @ 12:30PM|#

Scooby, see prev

Yes, I know. Legally, anyone over 18 is an adult. But, they're not. Not really. No.

It is very rare for anyone under approx 30 to be an adult. I don't know what has caused this historically, and maybe it's the fault of coddling parents, but it's just true. Or maybe I'm just an old fart who sees young bloodied bodies as dead babies.

Military training & experience--which I greatly respect--notwithstanding.

|5.2.07 @ 12:31PM|#

# Jozef | May 2, 2007, 12:25pm | #
# What really riled people down here in
# Atlanta, though, was that after this
# segment at the Boortz show they played Pat
# Benatar's "Hit me with your best shot".

In San Francisco in December, 1980, KFRC broke in to its music programming to report the shooting death of John Lennon. And what do you suppose was the song they played after the "special report": Queen's "Another One Bites The Dust." They broke into THAT song after about a minute, apologized for the gaffe, which they swore was inadvertent, and moved on to something else. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't heard it with my own ears.

|5.2.07 @ 12:31PM|#

Those only work on Yaks.

|5.2.07 @ 12:32PM|#

wsdave,

"Pretty much ANY waiting around for someone else to take care of you is a bad plan."

Really? Tell it to the students who survived because they, or their professor, held the door shut and waited for the police. You'd have had them rush him instead, so you can admire them for dying fighting?

mediageek,

"Joe, how much time passed from the first 911 call to the SWAT cops actually showing up?" I don't know. The people actually inside the building that day reported that the police were there quickly.

"Even in a perfect world, I have a hard time envisioning a group of cops being able to assemble, brief, gear up, and drive to the scene in that short of a time span." I guess you do.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 12:33PM|#

No matter how much I'd like to think that I'd do the same, I'm pretty sure I'd have been one of the first out the window.

Finally, some honesty on the internet!

FWIW, I'm pretty sure that I also would have been one of the first out the window.

Either that, or I'd be the student who over-thinks the problem and tries to devise some contraption to jam the door, and of course wastes way too much time in the process.

I'd like to think that I'd be piling furniture in front of the door in a manner that actually does something to stop the attacker from entering, but more likely I'd do something useless.

Either that, or I'd be out the window.

|5.2.07 @ 12:34PM|#

Lichtenberg, you're an idiot who's only purpose in this thread has been to engage in a circular argumentum ad nauseam argument.

Evidently the nurse needs to be notified that you're using the rest home's computer without supervision again.

|5.2.07 @ 12:37PM|#

"I guess you do."

Ok, joe, so, please, enlighten me:

How long does it take for the 911 operator to notify the higher ups, for the higher ups to assemble the SWAT Team members and bring them up to speed on what's known, then for the SWAT guys to put on kevlar vests, radios, etc., then lock and load their weaponry, and then all of them clamber into vehicles and drive to the scene?

|5.2.07 @ 12:39PM|#

I truthfuly dont see why people feel that its so wrong to criticize inaction in this case.

If someone from the baricaded room took down the barricade and tried rushing the shooter and got everyone in that roomed killed. Would it be OK to critisize his action? I think so, we can say we understand why, and that he was trying to do the right thing, but in hind sight, we could say that was the wrong course of action. To me its the same situation here, except the passive response vs active response.

VM|5.2.07 @ 12:39PM|#

Media:

The scene from Top Gun clears it up:

"It will be fixed in ten minutes, Sir."
"Ten minutes? Bullshit. This'll be over in two"

and Lichtenberg's group home monitor is indeed not watching who has access to the internet!

|5.2.07 @ 12:40PM|#

It is very rare for anyone under approx 30 to be an adult. I don't know what has caused this historically, and maybe it's the fault of coddling parents, but it's just true. Or maybe I'm just an old fart who sees young bloodied bodies as dead babies.

Actually I think the term for you is agist. But either way, since I dont see why you're trying to engage in logical conversation with me then, since judging by my age Im a child

|5.2.07 @ 12:44PM|#

What they did was let this broadcaster peel off outrageous assertions . . . .

"Peel off" assertions? Is that a Southern turn of phrase? I always thought "peel off" meant "remove" or "depart."

|5.2.07 @ 12:44PM|#

If those politicians hadn't stood up to Boortz and demanded he be kicked off the airwaves, wouldn't their passivity be exactly the kind of thing Boortz was inveighing against? He should applaud them for not being wimps. Then he should go fuck himself.

|5.2.07 @ 12:45PM|#

It takes exceptional training to get people to run toward a firing weapon, especially when they have been surprised, even when those who are surprised have weapons with which to fire back. Those who expect unarmed college students on a Monday morning to behave like a Marine recon platoon are just being stupid. Until you've been surprised by a man firing a weapon with ill-intent, you are probably well advised to refrain from criticizing the behavior of those who have.

|5.2.07 @ 12:47PM|#

"As far as trying to act during the time that it takes to aim, charging at him will make you an instant target."

From what I gather, Cho was simply firing indiscriminately at close range before retreating to the hallway to reload.

Scooby|5.2.07 @ 12:47PM|#

Lichtenberg

Why stop at 30? Most people (young and old) I meet are simpering pussies who would wet themselves at the sight of a gun pointed at them. That is the default condition- it takes either extraordinary cajones or repetitive conditioning to overcome that.

College students might be childish and/or immature, but they are not (with very few Dougie Howser-type exceptions) "children."

|5.2.07 @ 12:47PM|#

And Boortz's comment was out of line.

|5.2.07 @ 12:48PM|#

"It will be fixed in ten minutes, Sir."
"Ten minutes? Bullshit. This'll be over in two"

LOL!

Lichtenberg|5.2.07 @ 12:54PM|#

Wow.

I guess I could write something about the redundancy in using the Latin "argumentum" in the same phrase as the English "argument." I could correct the application of logical fallacies. Or, perhaps I could point out the grossly insulting things which were just posted regarding my age and/or my intelligence.

But, I won't. I don't like vitriol. I am tempted, though, to throw the young healthy nurses between me and the killer should anyone ever bother to start shooting at my "rest home."

|5.2.07 @ 12:59PM|#

Until you've been surprised by a man firing a weapon with ill-intent, you are probably well advised to refrain from criticizing the behavior of those who have.

That's one reason why I criticize their passive behavior. It's interesting, though, to see so many people rationalize their own fears that they'd be unable to do anything other than hide or run away.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 1:02PM|#

"I didn't spend all those years playing dungeons and dragons and not learn a little something about courage."

|5.2.07 @ 1:05PM|#

It's interesting, though, to see so many people rationalize their own fears that they'd be unable to do anything other than hide or run away.

By 'allowing' it in others, it's a way for people to deal with their own ...impotence... for lack of a better term.

|5.2.07 @ 1:06PM|#

"I guess I could write something about the redundancy in using the Latin "argumentum" in the same phrase as the English "argument." I could correct the application of logical fallacies. Or, perhaps I could point out the grossly insulting things which were just posted regarding my age and/or my intelligence."

That would at least be a bit of diversification of the "argument" that you've made in this thread thus far, Grandpa Fossil.

|5.2.07 @ 1:08PM|#

Mr. Le Mur, if you have had such an experience, and have reacted otherwise, good for you. That changes nothing about the empirical fact that the vast majority of people do not, and will not, absent very good training. Criticizing people for acting like people is like criticizing them for being unable to bench press 300 pounds. It is stupid, much as your dime store psychoanalysis is. Embracing stupidity is also a common human trait, however, so don't think I'm singling you out for criticism.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 1:09PM|#

Mr Tee Rowe: I'm not passing judgment either, but I know from personal experience that one can overcome some bad odds by acting rather than not acting. I also know you can't know how or what until it's time. It's not instinct either, although it may be partially just that. It's a long process of experience and thought and puzzling out what-if's in your spare time.

|5.2.07 @ 1:09PM|#

"That's one reason why I criticize their passive behavior. It's interesting, though, to see so many people rationalize their own fears that they'd be unable to do anything other than hide or run away."

Sometimes you get the bar, sometimes the bar gets you.

There's no certain thing in life. Now, perhaps if you're the sort who practices at the range several times a month, and/or attends martial arts practice with regularity, etc. you would be more likely to attack in such a situation.

But what if you're sitting dead center of the first row, and crazy murderer guy kicks the door in and with no warning begins to fire?

How quickly can you go from Kierkegaard to Kung-Fu?

|5.2.07 @ 1:11PM|#

That said, I do stand ready to defend myself, I do my best to stay aware of my surroundings, make note of exits, etc.

|5.2.07 @ 1:11PM|#

val, your real name wouldn't be Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper, would it? How's the regimen of distilled water and pure grain alcohol going?

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 1:13PM|#

Even in a perfect world, I have a hard time envisioning a group of cops being able to assemble, brief, gear up, and drive to the scene in that short of a time span.

In my neighborhood the cops aren't coming at all.

Last time I called 911 (years ago) it was because I heard a woman's blood curdling scream followed by a gunshot and silence. It took the Sheriff 4 hours to respond and they came to my front door and woke me up.

I told them the woman was undoubtedly dead and buried by then. The Deputy, who looked about 14, wasn't amused. He also didn't even bother to have a look around where the shot had come from.

|5.2.07 @ 1:13PM|#

mediageek,

"How long does it take for the 911 operator to notify the higher ups, for the higher ups to assemble the SWAT Team members and bring them up to speed on what's known, then for the SWAT guys to put on kevlar vests, radios, etc., then lock and load their weaponry, and then all of them clamber into vehicles and drive to the scene?"

Beats me. The people in the building report that the police showed up quickly.

VM|5.2.07 @ 1:15PM|#

Media -

you also have a good understanding of guns - what they are and aren't; what they can and can't do.

That is very important knowledge when you're considering those situations, I'd guess!

Aren't you also an EMT? Talk about an amazing profession!

|5.2.07 @ 1:15PM|#

Embracing stupidity is also a common human trait, however, so don't think I'm singling you out for criticism.

So is embracing mediocrity

Criticizing people for acting like people is like criticizing them for being unable to bench press 300 pounds

Why cant someone who can bench 300 pounds, cricize someone who cant?

Is it ok for you to critisize illiterate people? Or are we not allowed to critisize any attribute something if the majority of the people hold that attribute.

How's the regimen of distilled water and pure grain alcohol going?
Fantastic, my cojones have never been bigger or hairier, you should try it, sounds like you need a dash.

|5.2.07 @ 1:18PM|#

Nobody who has actually been in a lethal situation like this would criticize others for panicking or freezing.

Those who do criticize them are just advertising the fact that they're talking out of their asses.

|5.2.07 @ 1:20PM|#

joe, have you been in a situation like that?

highnumber|5.2.07 @ 1:21PM|#

I have always have an escape route and/or hiding place for when the ax murderer is chasing me.
The crazed gunman bursting into the room? That's a toughie.

|5.2.07 @ 1:21PM|#

val--Let me summerize responses to you so far: you're full of shit.

Unless you've been specifically trained to respond to this type situation and have had weapons pointed at you in the past and you know how you would respond again, you're just jerking off.

I've had guns pointed at me twice in my life. In neither situation did the voices in my head say "RUSH HIM! YOU CAN TAKE THIS BIG PUSSY." I was very open to any suggestion the weapon bearer said.

Spare us the psuedo-bravado, please. This situation was chaos. No one was thinking clearly. No one had time to formulate any plan other than "get the fuck out NOW." That would have been mine.

Smart and/or lucky lives. Stupid and macho dies. Except in the movies of course.

|5.2.07 @ 1:22PM|#

Leaving aside the accuracy/inaccuracy of what Boortz said, he is still an idiot. Anyone with sense knows criticising the dead - especially the recently, tragically dead - is social suicide.

Every child killed in an accident was a straight-A student and helpful angel. Every bystander killed in a shootout was a paragon of virtue and service.

If Boortz is so stupid he can't figure that out, he shouldn't be on the air. He should have known that every talking head among the pols and media would be dumping on him.

|5.2.07 @ 1:23PM|#

val,

I've never had a gunman burst into the room and start killing people around me.

Hence, my lack of authoritative statements about what I would do, and the absense of judgement on my part towards those who had to face such a situation.

VM|5.2.07 @ 1:23PM|#

High#:

except you forgot that the ax murderer has a telephone poll drill, but the cord length is limited, so you just hide in the corner.

Or else, the blood will fountain through the hole in the floor, drenching everything below.

And do you know how hard it is to get blood out of cashmere?

|5.2.07 @ 1:27PM|#

Because, Val, you ol' intellectual titan you, for an extraordinarily huge percentage of the population, the chance that the need will ever arise to be able to bench press 300 pounds is extraordinarily small. Thus, it would be exceptionally stupid to to put the training in to be able to perform the task, unless one enjoyed the training itself. Tell me, val, do you know how to land a 747? More importantly, do women sense your power? Preserve your essence, val!

I was going to ask if you knew how to perform emergency neurosurgery, until I reflected on the fact that it is likely that you have been practicing on yourself.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 1:27PM|#

If I were in a situation like that, I'd use my arm-mounted fist to conduct a tactical opening of the nearest transparent wall-mounted exit device. Then, while producing copious amounts of Fear-Activated Liquid Coolant (sweat) I'd use my rubber-coated leg-mounted transport equipment to make a strategic withdrawal. This would be my first order plan of strategic response. My second order strategic response option would be to produce acoustic waves emanating from my face-mounted gas flow device, probably to the effect of "HOLY SHIT! HELP ME!"

Cuz I'm a badass like that.

|5.2.07 @ 1:27PM|#

"you also have a good understanding of guns - what they are and aren't; what they can and can't do."

The thing is, a lot of people unfamiliar with guns think of them in an almost talismanic way. Those (like Boortz, evidently) think one need only have the gun on them to ward off evil.

Then you've got the anti-talismanic types (like joe) who come along, cluck their tongues, and say that you're being silly for carrying a charm.

The reality is this: A firearm is useless without the mindset to use it.

Those making the claim that an armed student or teacher wouldn't have made any difference at all are just projecting.

Those who are completely wrapped up in disparaging the victims of such a heinous crime are wrapped up in their own fantasies rather than having put some serious thought into the what-if's of such a situation.

"That is very important knowledge when you're considering those situations, I'd guess!"

This stuff isn't magic. Guys like Massad Ayoob and Louis Awerbuck have been writing about it and teaching small-arms self-defense courses for years.

"Aren't you also an EMT? Talk about an amazing profession!"

No, actually, I'm a graphic designer.

|5.2.07 @ 1:31PM|#

"If I were in a situation like that, I'd use my arm-mounted fist to conduct a tactical opening of the nearest transparent wall-mounted exit device. Then, while producing copious amounts of Fear-Activated Liquid Coolant (sweat) I'd use my rubber-coated leg-mounted transport equipment to make a strategic withdrawal. This would be my first order plan of strategic response. My second order strategic response option would be to produce acoustic waves emanating from my face-mounted gas flow device, probably to the effect of "HOLY SHIT! HELP ME!""

Brilliance. Pure, utter, shining, brilliance.

|5.2.07 @ 1:31PM|#

Smart and/or lucky lives. Stupid and macho dies. Except in the movies of course.


So the 32 that died, were which?

Hmm where was I being brave? Oh where I typed that I would have fucked up Cho with my amazing ninja skills? I said that for the 32 people hide-and-wait was definetely not the right course of action.

|5.2.07 @ 1:31PM|#

And that's "summarize", not "summerize." I have no idea how to prepare retorts for the hot weather.

|5.2.07 @ 1:32PM|#

"Beats me. The people in the building report that the police showed up quickly."

There's a difference between "quickly" and "weneedsomethingdoneRIGHTFUCKINGNOWbecausethere'sagoddamnednutshootingOMGOMGOMGOMG!"

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 1:32PM|#

Areson, that was a brilliant, brilliant, take on the Boortz controversy. Best I've seen, anywhere.

Cheers!

|5.2.07 @ 1:34PM|#

mediageek,

Actually, I've never claimed that "an armed student or teacher wouldn't have made any difference at all."

I've claimed that allowing guns to be carried on campus would probably not have put one in the hands of anyone in that building on that morning, and that there is a much higher chance that it would have put one or more in the hands of drunk frat guys on Friday and Saturday nights.

|5.2.07 @ 1:34PM|#

"So the 32 that died, were which?"

We're not sitting here pretending to know, a-hole.

|5.2.07 @ 1:35PM|#

re: not being able to say "nappy" or "ho" on the radio, is George Carlin now having to revise his famous list?

Yes, especially since a few of the words from the original list are now common on prime time programming (but don't you dare show nudity or lip-to-lip contact of two men).

Urkobold®|5.2.07 @ 1:35PM|#

(Urkobold wishes to apologize for such a big quote.)

Embracing stupidity is also a common human trait, however, so don't think I'm singling you out for criticism.

So is embracing mediocrity

Criticizing people for acting like people is like criticizing them for being unable to bench press 300 pounds

Why cant someone who can bench 300 pounds, cricize someone who cant?

Is it ok for you to critisize illiterate people? Or are we not allowed to critisize any attribute something if the majority of the people hold that attribute.

How's the regimen of distilled water and pure grain alcohol going?
Fantastic, my cojones have never been bigger or hairier, you should try it, sounds like you need a dash.

Huh. Please don't steal Urkobold's job.
The highlight was the part about critisizing [sic] illiterate people.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 1:35PM|#

mediageek, you call it brilliance. I call it Intelligence-Based Simulation of Tactical-Mimicking Bovine Excrement with High Impact Rhetorical Value.

|5.2.07 @ 1:38PM|#

"I've claimed that allowing guns to be carried on campus would probably not have put one in the hands of anyone in that building on that morning, and that there is a much higher chance that it would have put one or more in the hands of drunk frat guys on Friday and Saturday nights."

Po-tay-toe, Po-tah-toe.

ed|5.2.07 @ 1:39PM|#

I love it. The post is about censorship, First Amendment rights and abuse of political power, and the resultant thread focuses on whether a 20-year-old is a child or an adult, and if bullets are scary.

|5.2.07 @ 1:39PM|#

Absolutely, Mediageek. IF there had been a citizen in the building who had trained himself in the efective use of firearms, and IF he had been allowed to have such a weapon at his quick disposal, it might have made a HUGE difference. There was one professor, a military veteran, who was upstairs, and did run to the sound of a weapon being fired. He was unarmed, and was killed. I suspect that had he had a firearm, the bodycount might well have been much lower.

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 1:39PM|#

thoreau,

IBSTMBEHIRV? It's gonna be hard to fit that on a flak jacket.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 1:40PM|#

Those making the claim that an armed student or teacher wouldn't have made any difference at all are just projecting.

Actually, that was exactly what happened not far from VT.

|5.2.07 @ 1:40PM|#

I prefer to criticize the literate. They're more likely to fully appreciate and understand how truly insulting I'm being.

|5.2.07 @ 1:40PM|#

Yes, yes Urkobold, my sincerest apologies for any grammar and/or spelling mistakes.

...this post has been proofread three times, and spell and grammar checked with Microsoft Word.

|5.2.07 @ 1:41PM|#

So the 32 that died, were which?

I'd put that decidedly in the "not lucky" catagory.

Hmm where was I being brave?

Not here. All you're selling here is stupid and arrogance.

I said that for the 32 people hide-and-wait was definetely not the right course of action.

Let us know how that goes when you have weapons fire around you suddenly and need to come up with a plan that doesn't involve soiling yourself.

Once we regain our wits, Thoreau and I are out the window if time and situation permits. We'll be rooting from the outside for you and your bold, non-passive plans.

Mr. T|5.2.07 @ 1:41PM|#

I pity the fool who can't bench press 300 pounds!

|5.2.07 @ 1:42PM|#

I said that for the 32 people hide-and-wait was definetely not the right course of action.

But for the people who did survive (which outnumbered the fatalities by quite a bit) it was.

Maybe the point, dickhead, is that there is no "right" or "wrong" course of action (except maybe using a fellow student as a human shield) and you should stop passing judgment on the dead for not doing what you THINK you would do IF you were ever put in that situation.

Hmm where was I being brave?

You weren't/aren't being brave. You're being an asshole and you are posturing based on what you think you would do. Which pretty easy to do, after the fact, while sitting behind safely behind your computer.

You are the one passing judgment on the actions of other, not the people who are criticizing you. Those criticizing you aren't pretending to know what "the right course" of action was -- they are merely smart enough to understand that maybe those who didn't live through the tragic event should shut the fuck up and not pass judgment on the action/inaction of the victims by pretending to know what was right and what was wrong.

You're just as bad as the idiots who want to pretend that this tragedy could have been avoided if only there were more/different laws banning/allowing less/more guns.

"If only people would have acted the way I think they should have acted...." -- spare us the bullshit.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 1:42PM|#

I love it. The post is about censorship, First Amendment rights and abuse of political power, and the resultant thread focuses on whether a 20-year-old is a child or an adult, and if bullets are scary.

Ed, please pass me a roll of paper towels so I can wipe all the coffee I just sprayed all over the monitor when I LOL.

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 1:43PM|#

SugarFree-

Ok, we'll shorten it to "FARCE", with the precise meaning to be determined later.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 1:47PM|#

Media, you sure pissed some people off today. Not sure why they are SO pissed.

Jim Bob|5.2.07 @ 1:48PM|#

Boortz is an obnoxious asshole.

|5.2.07 @ 1:49PM|#

Maybe the point, dickhead, is that there is no "right" or "wrong" course of action (except maybe using a fellow student as a human shield) and you should stop passing judgment on the dead for not doing what you THINK you would do IF you were ever put in that situation.

Amazing. You feel that I'm passing moral judgment on them? I mean, wrong, as in surely gets you killed, right, as in doesn't. Not as in look at those douche-bags, they should have done something, if only I had been there...

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 1:51PM|#

thoreau,

Fantasy Attack Response Counter-Exposition?

thoreau|5.2.07 @ 1:52PM|#

Sounds good, SugarFree.

Bhh|5.2.07 @ 1:56PM|#

I like Boortz until he turned into just another Bush buttboy. Boooring!

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 1:57PM|#

You too Val, pissed them off, man.

|5.2.07 @ 1:58PM|#

"mediageek, you call it brilliance. I call it Intelligence-Based Simulation of Tactical-Mimicking Bovine Excrement with High Impact Rhetorical Value."

You've been lurking on gun forums, haven't you?

:-p

|5.2.07 @ 1:59PM|#

"Actually, that was exactly what happened not far from VT."

Tim Lambert comes a-sneerin' in 5...4...3..

|5.2.07 @ 2:00PM|#

Boortz is boorish.

|5.2.07 @ 2:00PM|#

"I like Boortz until he turned into just another Bush buttboy. Boooring"


Bill Clinton had a black secretary. George W. Bush has a black Secretary of State.

|5.2.07 @ 2:00PM|#

Media, you sure pissed some people off today. Not sure why they are SO pissed.

You too Val, pissed them off, man.

I dunno, too soon maybe?

|5.2.07 @ 2:01PM|#

"Media, you sure pissed some people off today. Not sure why they are SO pissed."

It's cuz I'm so pretty.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 2:04PM|#

Val, maybe too soon (shrugs). The anger seems out of proportion but maybe it's me.

Jim Bob|5.2.07 @ 2:05PM|#

Leaving aside the accuracy/inaccuracy of what Boortz said, he is still an idiot. Anyone with sense knows criticising the dead - especially the recently, tragically dead - is social suicide.

The day after a couple of Georgia teens died on a particularly nasty stretch of Georgia road, Boortz was on the radio badmouthing their parents for letting 16-year-olds drive. Not parents in general, but these particular parents, whose kids' bodies weren't even cold. He truly is human scum and says this shit just to get a rise out of people.

His ratings seem high. I wish I could be surprised.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 2:06PM|#

Here's what pissed me off.......

Scott Stevens knew Neal Boortz was a "hate monger."

Lead sentence in the story.

Scooby|5.2.07 @ 2:06PM|#

Sambo-

Bill Clinton got a blow job, which has absolutely nothing to do with George Bush fucking America in the ass and not having the decency to at least give a reach-around.

|5.2.07 @ 2:07PM|#

Val, maybe too soon (shrugs). The anger seems out of proportion but maybe it's me.

The out of proportion part is accounted for by mediageek's prettiness

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 2:09PM|#

OK, how's this...

Everybody on the thread. Hands up if you've ever been shot at.

Hint: My hand is up.

Everybody whose hand is not up, maybe you shouldn't judge these young adults too harshly for not rushing a gunman.

Everybody whose hand is up and are still suggesting they should have rushed him, what did you do in your situation?

If you did rush him, bully for you. How'd that work out? Would you do it again?

But, if you didn't, and you are calling these kids cowards, maybe you should think about popping the top on a big ol' can of STFU soda. It's clean and refreshing.

Hint: I just got shot. (No time to think or rush or any other shit brought up here.)

Don't lie. Urkobold knows when you lie.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 2:12PM|#

I don't listen to Boortz much, so I wouldn't know if the Jim Bob story is correct. But if it is and you couple that with the VT remarks, it does show a certain callousness, lack of good manners, empathy, and social ineptitude. Maybe an hour with Miss Manners would help.

Then again, Boortz links to my website so who am I to criticize?

What?

:-)

|5.2.07 @ 2:14PM|#

Idiocy consistently irritates me to a significant degree. Thus, when someone wonders why a person who can bench press 300 pounds should refrain from criticizing someone who can't, or when someone analogizes between putting the time in to become literate with putting the time in to be able to effectively respond, while unarmed, to an attacker brandishing two sem-automatic pistols, well, the ol' idiotometer starts redlining, and yes, I respond with significant irritation.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 2:17PM|#

I CAN bench 300lbs.

|5.2.07 @ 2:18PM|#

SugarFree,

Im assuming that is directed (at least in part, probably in whole) at me.

No, I've never been shot. Can you go through this thread and point out where I or anyone called these people pussies or cowards or antyhing of the sort. I simply said that in hind sight, knowing the outcome now, for those thirty two people, hide-and-wait was not the correct (im not gonna use 'right' again) course of action.

Neither did I ever say that I would have acted differently in a similar situation. I think the only way I would ever consider doing anything else then runing for my life, is if I had a gun myself or that was a complete and absolutely last chance I had.

|5.2.07 @ 2:19PM|#

I've never listened to Boortz either, but if I don't like what he said (and this is any example, then, no sir, don't like it at all) all I have to do is turn that dial on the radio. I don't need any congressional thuggery to do that for me.

Asshats. Now I have to root for Boortz.

|5.2.07 @ 2:19PM|#

First, I duck and take cover if I can find some.
Second, I retrieve my Makarov from my fanny pack.
Third, turn the safety off and chamber the first round.
Fourth, take aim and fire at the aggressor.

It is second nature.

My first nature is to avoid places that do not recognize my concealed carry permit.

|5.2.07 @ 2:19PM|#

"But, if you didn't, and you are calling these kids cowards, maybe you should think about popping the top on a big ol' can of STFU soda. It's clean and refreshing."

Yeah, but does it have electrolytes?

|5.2.07 @ 2:20PM|#

Will Allen, I can bench 300 lbs, and you're a damn weakling if you can't. Hot dog, amazing I can criticize someone for not being able to do something I can.

|5.2.07 @ 2:22PM|#

Yeah, but does it have electrolytes?

Better question...what's its transfats content?

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 2:22PM|#

Will, I understand where your coming from. I think if those guys were discussing this in an abstract way that didn't involve a very real tragedy that JUST happened, the response may have been less intense.

|5.2.07 @ 2:22PM|#

I mean, wrong, as in surely gets you killed, right, as in doesn't.

Oh ok. That makes sense. As long as you ignore the part where many/most of the survivors didn't do anything different than the ones who were killed. Last I checked, none of the victims -- fatalities or survivors-- went after the guy and most were quite passive. Yet there were more survivors than fatalities.

Furthermore, doing what you think is "right" -- not being passive, wouldn't guarantee that those doing the "right" thing wouldn't become fatalities.

So maybe "surely" doesn't mean what you think it means. Maybe what you meant to say was "might" -- "I mean, wrong, as in might get you killed, right, as in might not" -- and maybe your whole point is nothing more that bloviating to puff up your own sense of superior judgment

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 2:24PM|#

NoStar, I like the way you think. Drinking buddies in a future life, indeed.

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 2:25PM|#

val,

Actually it was directed at all the armchair generals that have popped up on all of the VT threads and Boortz, et al.

You don't have you hand up, so I was only suggesting that you not judge them so harshly.

Getting shot at is sudden. You don't have time to do anything. That they made it under desks, that they barricaded some of the doors, that some of them made it out windows, that in nine minutes of gunfire and scream and chaos they managed to do anything is already amazing. I'm not going to criticize them at all.

highnumber|5.2.07 @ 2:26PM|#

Electrolytes - what mediageeks crave?

Jim Bob|5.2.07 @ 2:28PM|#

Either way, looks like Boortz succeeded in getting some more attention.

I can't bench 300lbs, but I can squat 365 and deadlift 335. Pretty weak, but I listen to Meshuggah to make up for it.

And, of course, I drink Brawndo™.

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 2:32PM|#

STFU soda is made from the juice of free range fucktards from all over the tri-state area. It is chock full of both electrolytes, vitamins, and other nutrients vital to anonymously calling the dead cowards.*

STFU Soda! You can really taste the fucktard!



*not directed to anyone, just included for the purpose of hyperbole...

|5.2.07 @ 2:34PM|#

Oh ok. That makes sense. As long as you ignore the part where many/most of the survivors didn't do anything different than the ones who were killed. Last I checked, none of the victims -- fatalities or survivors-- went after the guy and most were quite passive. Yet there were more survivors than fatalities.
. . .
So maybe "surely" doesn't mean what you think it means. Maybe what you meant to say was "might" -- "I mean, wrong, as in might get you killed, right, as in might not" -- and maybe your whole point is nothing more that bloviating to puff up your own sense of superior judgment


No no, I mean surely as in surely. Surely those thrity two people are surely dead. Surely, some of those are survivors are alive, because others like, Liviu Lebrescu, chose a different course of action then you prescribe.
But hey as long as you whole argument revolves around the fact that there were more survivors than victims, you really dont need to engage in this conversation, since such incidents are so rare that vast majority of the time we dont even have to talk about this.

|5.2.07 @ 2:35PM|#

You don't have you hand up, so I was only suggesting that you not judge them so harshly

Fine, but I wanted to mention that I didnt judge then anywhere at all, neither leniently nor harshly.

|5.2.07 @ 2:39PM|#

If you think Iowa City is 'not far' from Blacksburg, you're on a different planet.

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 2:41PM|#

val,

A lot of people seem to be taking your comments that way. It's neither here nor there to me, but that does seem to be the consensus.

|5.2.07 @ 2:42PM|#

Val, I can put up four consecutive posts without writing something exceedingly stupid. Give it a try.

|5.2.07 @ 2:44PM|#

Fine, but I wanted to mention that I didnt judge then anywhere at all, neither leniently nor harshly.

SPIT TAKE!!!!

Nah, you just thought Wyle E. Coyote should have used a bigger umbrella.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 2:47PM|#

Actually, there is no way in hell that I could bench 300lbs. That's the drawback to this medium, you can't see my smirk and look me dead in the eyes, touch my flabby biceps, and say, you lyin' sack of wheat, you haven't been able to bench press anything heavier than a bottle of wine in at least two decades.

|5.2.07 @ 2:51PM|#

"Electrolytes - what mediageeks crave?"

That, and going to Starbucks.

|5.2.07 @ 2:53PM|#

No, val, implying that to fail to be critical of their actions was an embrace of "mediocrity" wasn't judgemental in the least.

All right, all right, let's lower the bar; can you put up two consecutive posts without writing something stupid?

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 2:54PM|#

I prefer a nice, hot, steaming CUP of STFU.

|5.2.07 @ 2:55PM|#

C'mon TWC, don't be modest. I've seen you throw as far away as possible 2 bottles of cheap Chardonnay at once.

|5.2.07 @ 2:56PM|#

Hell, commonsewer, I just assumed you were moving around 300 pound barrels of maturing cabernet like they were 12 oz. soda cans!

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 2:58PM|#

If you think Iowa City is 'not far' from Blacksburg, you're on a different planet.

MacPimp, nothing happened in Iowa City except an article was published about something that happened not to far from Blacksburg, in Grundy Virginia, which was reported in the very first sentence of the story you didn't bother to read.

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 2:59PM|#

Warning! Do not heat STFU Soda or consume near flame!

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 3:01PM|#

JW, you're right about the cheap Chard, but that was in the best days of my wasted yoot.

Will, that is a great visual, I actually have a barbell that's made of a steel pipe with a 300lb barrel of cab on EACH end. So, in reality, on a good day, I guess I can bench 600 lbs.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 3:01PM|#

Is STFU soda made with Splenda?

|5.2.07 @ 3:02PM|#

Will Allen, the mediocrity piece, was directed you. When, Le Mur suggested that he had been in dangerous situation (dont know if thats true), and acted differently, you just flat out dismissed his criticism. And said that the majority of people would not have acted like that. You feel that those who excell at something, no matter how useful or useless, have no right to critisize those who do not, because the latter are a majority. Hence my comment about embracing mediocrity.

parse|5.2.07 @ 3:02PM|#

you should have gotten into a karate stance and fought off the entire Iranian navy with a toothache!

I once asked a black belt if he thought his training in Tai Kwan Do would be useful in he were ever robbed at gunpoint.

"Sure," he told me. "I can reach for my wallet much more quickly than the averarge victim."

|5.2.07 @ 3:03PM|#

Boortz is a douche and a war-monger.

He does NOT make me proud to be a libertarian.

In this instance, the moron went shooting off his mouth without the facts. Why not just wait until you have enough information to know what you're talking about?

Also, I liked how he didn't want to wait until the bodies had cooled to begin insulting the dead. Classy!

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 3:04PM|#

Is STFU soda made with Splenda?

Well it wouldn't be Sugar Free if it wasn't!

(Har-dee-har-har.)

Regular STFU Soda is made with HFCS, of course.

|5.2.07 @ 3:06PM|#

Surely those thrity two people are surely dead. Surely, some of those are survivors are alive, because others like, Liviu Lebrescu, chose a different course of action then you prescribe.


You aren't making any sense.

By Your logic, being passive is the "wrong" thing and the wrong thing "surely" will get you killed. Yet many "wrong" actors survived-- many survivors were mere duck and cover actors. So surely your point is bullshit. Doing the "wrong" thing will not in fact "surely" get you killed. It might, but it might not, surely.

ALso by your logic, not being passive and in fact being aggressive and going after the shooter is the "right" thing. And doing the right thing "surely" will allow you to survive. Unless of course you get shot and killed by the shooter while going after him/her. So again, your logic surely is bullshit, because doing the "right" thing will not "surely" guarantee your survival. It might, but it might not, surely.

But I do agree with one thing you said: The 32 dead surely are dead. That is the only valid point you have made today.

|5.2.07 @ 3:13PM|#

I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.

Bazil|5.2.07 @ 3:18PM|#

Yawn

Can't people be crazy anymore? Must we always have a cause and effect explanation for every wacko that will end up requiring some kind of legislation?

|5.2.07 @ 3:21PM|#

That's fine, Bazil, but do they ALL have to host conservative radio shows?

|5.2.07 @ 3:23PM|#

Zing!

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 3:26PM|#

Zing! Soda went off the market years ago. After all those Inuits went deaf.

|5.2.07 @ 3:28PM|#

"Regular STFU Soda is made with HFCS, of course."

And, no doubt, fire when gently bumped.

|5.2.07 @ 3:52PM|#

Good gravy, val, do we have to lower the bar to a single post? Can you decipher the meaning of the words you write yourself? If you say I am embracing mediocrity by saying it is wrong to criticize the behavior of the VT students, because most people would act in that manner, whose behavior is being referred to as "mediocre"? Is not describing behavior as "mediocre" a form of judgement?

Finally, read extremely slowly, to ensure there is no misunderstanding. I never said that a minority who can do something should never criticize a majority which cannnot do that thing. I said that if the thing being done requires a substantial amount of training, like bench presing 300 pounds, or effectively responding, while unarmed, to an attacker who is firing two semiautomatic pistols, and the thing being trained for is very unlikely to have a practical application in a person's life, other than the person enjoying the training, THEN it is stupid for the minority who can do that thing to criticize the majority which cannot. Got it?

Sheesh!

|5.2.07 @ 4:01PM|#

"Neither did I ever say that I would have acted differently in a similar situation. I think the only way I would ever consider doing anything else then running for my life, is if I had a gun myself or that was a complete and absolutely last chance I had."

I live in Minneapolis where just last week -- a few blocks from my house -- two people were robbed at gunpoint. But it didn't stop there. The robbers (black Male 15, black female 17 & black male 19) MADE THE VICTIMS KNEEL DOWN AND THEN EXECUTED THEM WITH POINT-BLANK SHOTS IN THE HEAD.

Interestingly, they had tried the same MO on another guy about an hour earlier, but their gun jammed.

http://www.startribune.com/467/story/1134236.html

Two lessons from this story:

1) Security specialist will tell you that statistically, if you submit to a shooter, you're more likely to be shot and killed than if you resist.

2) Black is beautiful, nigger a pathology.

|5.2.07 @ 4:06PM|#

Someone to the left of center says that VA should have had a ban on firearms. He is applauded for his stupid and erroneous statement. Someone to the right of center says that the students stood and waited to be executed. He is ridiculed for his stupid and erroneous statement.

This demonstrates that only those on the right (including libertarians) will be held accountable for their words and deeds. Imus isn't an exception, because he kept being described as "conservative." Rosie isn't an exception, because it was pressure from conservatives that got her fired. Quite simply, the left can do no wrong and the right can do no [sic] right.

VM|5.2.07 @ 4:30PM|#

media - cool! thanks again!

Dr. T: wundaboa! awesome! leiwand! cool! fantastic!

"SugarFree | May 2, 2007, 3:26pm | #
Zing! Soda went off the market years ago. After all those Inuits went deaf."

Now that ProGLib is in charge in Gønland, he can reinstate it!

media - only when gently bumped. and again. faster and faster. a little rougher. weeehoooooo!

[um. runs off]

|5.2.07 @ 4:33PM|#

"This demonstrates that only those on the right (including libertarians) will be held accountable for their words and deeds."

No, it demonstrates that insulting recently murdered people as cowards is not as acceptable as discussing public policy.

But keep striving for that sweet, sweet victimhood.

|5.2.07 @ 4:35PM|#

This all comes down to what your neighbors don't want to listen to, but also don't want you to listen to, either. Keep the thug rap, keep Imus, keep speech. It's really disgusting how we think we're going to whitewash our language and society if we can just reform the media. Americans are famous worldwide for being crass and rude. Our media may also have the same reputation, but changing the media isn't going to change the people. It's the damn people.

SugarFree|5.2.07 @ 4:47PM|#

But keep striving for that sweet, sweet victimhood.

Tis more sweet than the sweetest corn syrup, light on the tongue and filling in the belly...

The Wine Commonsewer|5.2.07 @ 4:52PM|#

That's fine, Bazil, but do they ALL have to host conservative radio shows?

No, some of them end up at Air America and that crazy Latte Liberal's blog. You know, the chick who jets around the world lecturing the plebes about buying a Prius.

|5.2.07 @ 5:30PM|#

By Your logic, being passive is the "wrong" thing and the wrong thing "surely" will get you killed. Yet many "wrong" actors survived.

This is getting flat out tiresome. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_victims_of_the_Virginia_Tech_massacre)

room 204- 2 victims out of 10 (this where professor Librescu blocked the door while others escaped through the window)
room 206- 10 victims out of 14
room 207- 5 victims out of 12
room 211- 12 victims out of 19 (this where Matthew La Porte, an Air Force ROTC student, is reported to have attempted to tackle Cho from behind but was fatally injured in the attempt. This is where Cho killed himself)
hallway - 1 dead

This doesnt include injuries, fatalities only.

So ya, I repeat, being passive was not the correct course of action here. If you factor in people wounded by Cho, you can see that the vast majority of the people was indeed shot. The other majority of the actors as you describe never actually faced the shooter.

Now that there is a bad taste in my mouth after having to count the dead like a score, im off. Im sorry to all for all your offended sensibilities.

Mike Laursen|5.2.07 @ 5:32PM|#

I don't recall Boortz -- was there a recent "relaunch" that I perhaps missed which featured him?

My recall is faulty (but better than Alberto Gonzales'), but I think it was in the early 2000s. I had never heard of KSFO until sometime around 9/11.

Normal|5.2.07 @ 5:34PM|#

Boortz is one of the best radio guys there is. period.

Mike Laursen|5.2.07 @ 5:36PM|#

... and the resultant thread focuses on whether a 20-year-old is a child or an adult, and if bullets are scary.

A Hit & Run comments section has focus?!

|5.2.07 @ 5:42PM|#

Will somone please start shooting at val?

I need to see this non-passive plan in action.

VM|5.2.07 @ 5:52PM|#

JW,

Can do one better. We happen to have film of val fighting. Granted it's against some d00d armed with a scythe (who apparently also dropped a chromosome along the way).

But his tuff guy antics really learned Scythe D00d!

hier

|5.2.07 @ 6:06PM|#

Blaming unarmed people for failing to resist against an armed antagonist? The guy deserves to get fired.

It's a damn shame, though, that the people who believe that legislating a university (or any other public space) as a "gun-free zone" would make law-abiding citizens safer weren't the ones placed in the position of making the coin flip of a "decision" to either fight for their lives or hope that compliance with an armed assailant would bring mercy rather than execution.

Too bad that their hope for mercy was in vain, and frankly, the legislators should be held accountable for this. I'd even go so far as to say that a return to tarring and feathering followed by being ridden out of town on a rail is probably the most appropriate end to said legislator's careers.

highnumber|5.2.07 @ 6:10PM|#

VM,

Wow. What a fight scene. Wow.

Speechless.

|5.2.07 @ 7:35PM|#

thoreau wrote:

At VA Tech, they had good reason to believe that rescue might be imminent.

What "good reason" was that?

I can't think of a single mass-shooting case where rescue was accomplished by anyone who wasn't there when the shooting started. And VT, by government fiat, was a Designated Victim Pool.

|5.2.07 @ 8:08PM|#

Jozef wrote:

What really riled people down here in Atlanta, though, was that after this segment at the Boortz show they played Pat Benatar's "Hit me with the best shot".

FYI, bumper music at most stations is randomly selected by computer, due to copyright and music-licensing law (if you select a song specifically, that's "performance" and must be paid -- if the computer picks it randomly from a pool of options, that's "fair use excerpting").

|5.2.07 @ 8:16PM|#

joe wrote:

I've claimed that allowing guns to be carried on campus would probably not have put one in the hands of anyone in that building on that morning, and that there is a much higher chance that it would have put one or more in the hands of drunk frat guys on Friday and Saturday nights.

Upon what do you base this absurd assumption? How well do you know each of the hundreds of people in that building, that you can say that not one of them would have had a gun?

There are hundreds of thousands of fraternity members in the US. How many cases of drunk-frat-guy-related shootings can you document?

Seems to me that you're pulling "probabilities" out of your own assumptions.

ed|5.2.07 @ 8:51PM|#

Um, so...a guy on a radio station should or should not be able to say any stupid thing he pleases?

Discuss (further).

|5.2.07 @ 9:08PM|#

Seems to be a requirement of talk show hosts to say stupid things.

wsdave|5.2.07 @ 9:35PM|#

joe,
"Really? Tell it to the students who survived because they, or their professor, held the door shut and waited for the police. You'd have had them rush him instead, so you can admire them for dying fighting?"

No, joe: Holding the door shut IS taking care of yourself. If they were able to keep him from coming in, they don't have to rush him. Why is that so difficult for you?

Bubba Gumps\' Buddy|5.2.07 @ 9:40PM|#

Stupid is as stupid does...

And Ed, yes.

|5.2.07 @ 11:36PM|#

Talk about reacting like a pussy. You know what I would have done in that situation?

As soon as I heard that guy might be coming for us I'd be at a window looking for him, man. And when I saw him walking toward our building, I'd run to the building entrance before he could get there. To like head him off.

Then I'd like climb up and hang from the ceiling right above the main entrance of the building, out of sight of the the guy. Like Batman or something. And I'd wait. And when the dude came in through the doors, I'd like drop down right on the guy's shoulders, man, and knock his ass down, right down to the floor. It would knock the weapon right out of the guy's hand! And he'd be like, "What?"

And then I'd clamp my thighs around the dude's neck in a scissors hold until he totally passed out from lack of blood flow.

And then, just to be sure, I'd like punch the dude right across the face, you know, just to make sure he stayed knocked out. I'd be like, BAAAAMMMM!

And then all the hot chicks in the building would like be totally all over me for saving them.

Yeah. That's what I'd do if I was a broadcaster and some politician threatened to come to my station and take my broadcasting license away.

|5.2.07 @ 11:39PM|#

I CAN bench 300lbs.

Hey, so can I, man.

Just not all at once.

But 50 pounds, six reps ... I wouldn't even break a sweat, hardly.

|5.3.07 @ 12:25AM|#

Stevo: BWA-HA-HA! How many 12-oz. curls in 300 lbs.?

As for this:

... I simply said that in hind sight, knowing the outcome now, for those thirty two people, hide-and-wait was not the correct (im not gonna use 'right' again) course of action. - val

There's no way to know if that's true. The most successful strategy seems to have been slamming the doors on the nutbar before he could enter a classroom, and calling the cops. Even that resulted in at least one dead hero, Prof L. It would have been nice if someone who couldn't do that, someone who was caught out in the hall and couldn't take cover, say, had disobeyed university rules, carried a pistol that day and knew how to use it. Coulda, shoulda, woulda doesn't cut it, though.

Neither did I ever say that I would have acted differently in a similar situation. I think the only way I would ever consider doing anything else then runing for my life, is if I had a gun myself or that was a complete and absolutely last chance I had. - val>

That makes more sense, but runs contrary to the spirit of everything else you have posted.

Had something like this happened to me when I was a collegian, I have no idea how I would have responded. Concealed carry wasn't legal in the state and city where I was educated, and if the school didn't have a rule against going armed then it almost surely has one now.

Here's how I'd hope I'd react. Interpose some large, heavy furniture between him and me, and leave by the best available exit, taking care to follow the ancient code for catastrophes: If the chance arises, get those less mobile than myself - children, those in wheelchairs, and, forgive me the sexism, women, out the door or window first.

I'm under no illusions that I would have rushed the shooter. I've always been too much of a klutz to pull off a move like that, even when I was young and close to fit. Participating in a Flight 93-style charge after huddling up and learning that we were almost certainly doomed anyway is another thing. Most healthy, youngish guys would probably join in. Who would want to be the wuss who hid with the sick and injured? Without a chance to coordinate an atttack, with nobody looking you in the eye and challenging you not to shame yourself, who among us would confront an armed madman barehanded?

Kevin

|5.3.07 @ 12:33AM|#

@#%! html tags!

BTW, that "peel off" quote would make more sense if they had spelled it p-e-A-l, like the "peal of bells," what with radio being an audio medium and all.

Kevin

|5.3.07 @ 9:31AM|#

ed,

"Um, so...a guy on a radio station should or should not be able to say any stupid thing he pleases?"
'
Oh, no, he should be able to say anything he wants.

But sometimes a joke is so bad, or a an argument is repellent, that booing becomes a moral imperative.

That's all we're doing: booing the guy.

LarryA|5.3.07 @ 6:45PM|#

Boortz needs to be kicked in the balls for trying to pass off this "culture of passivity" meme, along with Steyn and a couple other whack jobs who were peddling the idea in the aftermath of the shootings.

So are you saying that our elementary, middle, and high schools should teach the philosophy that you should never use force even if attacked by someone using violence? Because that is what a lot of them are promoting.

At VA Tech, they had good reason to believe that rescue might be imminent."...
And fortunately, we don't have to speculate on whether their belief was reasonable; we now know that it was, and that the police got to the scene quickly and immediately went inside, running around and looking for the killer.

This is "good news" in that there were "only" 32 killed. SWAT teams are never going to be responsive enough for this kind of situation, unless you write off the first 8 or 10 minutes worth of victims. The only truly "imminent" rescue is to have your own gun to shoot back with.

(2) it's hard to coordinate any sort of defensive activity on the spur of the moment while bullets are flying.

But whether I am the only one in the class with a gun handy, or there are two or three others, I don't have to coordinate. Just aim and shoot.

I truthfully don't see why people feel that its so wrong to criticize inaction in this case. If someone from the barricaded room took down the barricade and tried rushing the shooter and got everyone in that roomed killed.

Barricading the door is not "inaction." It is, if you are unarmed a fairly good course of action.

What I find disturbing is the university president who spends millions of dollars on an armed police force, including automatic weapons and SWAT teams and training drills, and then calls students who want to carry "paranoid" because such incidents are too rare to worry about. It's the "you don't have to be prepared for life-or-death situations because the government will take care of you" mindset.

It is very rare for anyone under approx 30 to be an adult. I don't know what has caused this historically, and maybe it's the fault of coddling parents, but it's just true.

There was at least one high school shooting where a student and his brother (who happened to be avid shooters) charged the gunman when his gun ran dry. They were successful in tackling him and stopping the rampage. One was wounded, both survived. And, by the way, so did the shooter.

I've claimed that allowing guns to be carried on campus would probably not have put one in the hands of anyone in that building on that morning,

"Probably." OTOH prohibiting carrying reduced the chances to zero. And remember that the campus had two bomb scares shortly before, which could have created a higher state of awareness.

and that there is a much higher chance that it would have put one or more in the hands of drunk frat guys on Friday and Saturday nights.

Carrying while intoxicated is illegal, and CHLs are restricted to persons over 21. Having trained a couple of thousand licensees, I feel this is a more remote possibility than your first. CHLs have a demonstrated record of law-abiding public behavior.

Boortz actually walked back the remarks after he made them, although he was careful to note that he still rejected a "culture of passivity."

Bingo. I'm not criticizing the students and professors. I'm criticizing the administration for making the campus a "gun-free zone" and pushing the fantasy that therefore only the administration has to worry about violence.

wsdave|5.3.07 @ 9:03PM|#

LarryA,
"What I find disturbing is the university president who spends millions of dollars on an armed police force, including automatic weapons and SWAT teams and training drills, and then calls students who want to carry "paranoid" because such incidents are too rare to worry about. It's the "you don't have to be prepared for life-or-death situations because the government will take care of you" mindset."

Wow. WOW. I think this is the best paragraph in all 205 posts. And since this holds true for every juristiction(sp), I'm going to use it to explain why carrying a gun is never a bad thing. Assuming that you're OK with that, since you said it first.